RIGHT TO EDUCATION : AN EVOLUTION

IN a world tilted towards the dictum of ‘no free lunches’, the RTE (Right of children to free and compulsory education) Act with its egalitarian provisions has completed one year of successful implementation. Successful because 15 states have notified it. On the first anniversary of the enactment of the Act, an upbeat HRD Minister, Kapil Sibal, talked of achieving ‘education for all’ by 2015. On the other hand, several provisions in the act are proving to be impractical to implement, even to the well-meaning educationists. They also pose a basic question on the concept of ‘education for all’ per se.

Despite self- congratulatory claims of its success, a few moot questions remain unanswered. For example, the government directs inclusion of 25 per cent students from economically weaker sections in private unaided schools. But, it fails to set up reasonable terms of compensation to the schools struggling for survival. Particularly the neighbourhood ‘budget schools’ which have served the purpose well by providing meaningful education at low cost. Secondly, no method is prescribed for selection for admission. Selection by lottery is as ridiculous and unfair a method as is interviewing the child. Also, the curriculum does not take into account children’s experiences and needs, especially of those who come from the weaker sections. Rote-driven, textbook-centred teaching and lack of support as well as motivation among teachers to address the specific situation of diverse kinds of children is another challenge. The moot question is: will these children be able to remain in mainstream education and how?
While the Act emphasises the need for child-friendly approaches and higher parental representation in school management, very little is provided for the need to have teacher-friendly and teacher-initiated processes in the school system. The academic administration remains heavily top-down and vertically organized, leaving very little scope for teacher participation or initiative. The Act also disallows any child to be held back or for conducting standardised examinations until completion of elementary education. It certainly offers a trauma-free educational experience, at the same time it puts a child who comes with the disadvantage of illiterate parents at greater risk. Lack of assessment of learning achievements makes it impossible for him to be identified for remedial assistance. Before aiming for a hasty implementation of the act, the planners should have sought insightful remedies for several psycho-social and pedagogic issues that emerge from integrating students from low-income families with those of the privileged class; especially in our society, where class and caste boundaries are indelibly etched.